Bug#234615: marked as done (apache2-common: NameVirtualHost requires _default_ not *)
Your message dated Wed, 24 Mar 2004 17:57:48 +0000
with message-id <20040324175748.GA5793@mirror.positive-internet.com>
and subject line User error
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 24 Feb 2004 20:12:05 +0000
>From cfry@frogcircus.org Tue Feb 24 12:12:05 2004
Return-path: <cfry@frogcircus.org>
Received: from frogcircus.org [66.45.230.197]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1AviuT-0002eR-00; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:12:05 -0800
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
(uid 1000)
by frogcircus.org with local; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:12:04 -0500
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Charles Fry <debian@frogcircus.org>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: apache2-common: NameVirtualHost requires _default_ not *
X-Mailer: reportbug 2.39
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:12:04 -0500
Message-ID: <courier.403BB014.00000DFF@frogcircus.org>
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_02_22
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0 tests=HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no
version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_02_22
X-Spam-Level:
Package: apache2-common
Severity: normal
The [1][2]Apache documentation indicates that when using
NameVirtualHost, the VirtualHost directive should use * (as opposed to
_default_) to match all IP addresses. However my experimentation has
demonstrated that if I have multiple VirtualHost entries, with different
ServerNames, all starting with the line:
<VirtualHost *:80>
Every server name will be matched by the first VirtualHost entry.
However, the documented behavior was achieved by using _default instead:
<VirtualHost _default_:80>
This is either a bug in the implementation, or the documentation.
Charles
1. http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.0/mod/core.html#virtualhost
2. http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.0/vhosts/name-based.html
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Kernel: Linux frogcircus.org 2.4.25-5um #5 Thu Feb 19 14:29:11 EST 2004 i686
Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 234615-done) by bugs.debian.org; 24 Mar 2004 17:57:50 +0000
>From thom@debian.org Wed Mar 24 09:57:50 2004
Return-path: <thom@debian.org>
Received: from mirror.positive-internet.com [80.87.128.67] (postfix)
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1B6CdR-0002dH-00; Wed, 24 Mar 2004 09:57:49 -0800
Received: by mirror.positive-internet.com (Postfix, from userid 1002)
id 9B9014301F; Wed, 24 Mar 2004 17:57:48 +0000 (GMT)
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 17:57:48 +0000
From: Thom May <thom@debian.org>
To: 234615-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: User error
Message-ID: <20040324175748.GA5793@mirror.positive-internet.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Operating-System: Linux/2.6.2-1-686 (i686)
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i
Delivered-To: 234615-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_12
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no
version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_12
X-Spam-Level:
You've described perfectly the situation where you do not have a
NameVirtualHost line that does not match your VirtualHost stanzas.
eg:
NameVirtualHost *:80
<VirtualHost *>
....
</VirtualHost>
Apache will produce a warning in that case.
I have many hundred systems all using VirtualHost * succesfully with
numerous virtual hosts.
-Thom
Reply to: